| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 38285 | 2003-10-02 13:05:00 | Ram Drive 4 Win 98? | eef2 (1904) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 179886 | 2003-10-03 06:41:00 | Does windows re-create the swap file onto the ramdisk at bootup, as it would have been deleted? Also if the temp directory is permanently on the ram disk, then I guess windows has to create it or there will be problems right? Is 384mb enough for this to work? ;) |
PoWa (203) | ||
| 179887 | 2003-10-03 10:29:00 | . | PoWa (203) | ||
| 179888 | 2003-10-03 12:09:00 | > Does windows re-create the swap file onto the ramdisk > at bootup, as it would have been deleted? > > Also if the temp directory is permanently on the ram > disk, then I guess windows has to create it or there > will be problems right? > > Is 384mb enough for this to work? ;) It depends on how large your current SWAP file is. Basically how it works is because it empties the SWAP on shutdown, it re-creates it when it starts up on that RAM drive, so as long as you have specified the RAM drive as your partition/HDD to hold your SWAP file, then yes, it will be fine. Yes, Windows should re-create the temp folder too. So, the question remains, what size is your current SWAP file? You really need to leave doze around 150MB for Win2K/XP, or 96+ for 95/98/ME. Hope this helps Chill. |
Chilling_Silently (228) | ||
| 179889 | 2003-10-03 13:41:00 | Thanks, John. I'll have a look at that link. I use Win 98 SE with 64Mb ram and have taken to reserving 200 mb of disk space to a virtual memory instead of having a swap file. This appears to make RAM Idle redundant. I need to keep an eye on disk usage, though, in case those megabytes fall lower than the 200 reserved. I am wondering whether my 64mb ram is enough to install ram drive - we'll see. |
eef2 (1904) | ||
| 179890 | 2003-10-04 00:00:00 | This link (members.aol.com) is a good guide( it worked for me so it must be good). My experience using a ram drive with Netscapel(pre Mozilla), Mozilla, and IE was a noticable speed up. I suspect Opera uses one already, so not much difference there. The one problem is that with downloads, you need a fair size to accomodate larger files, otherwise you have to disable the drive and download normally. All the files and directories have to be created in the autoexec.bat file on startup ie MD F:\TEMP SET TEMP=F:\TEMP SET TMP=F:\TEMP is what I have to setup the ramdrive(F:) with a temp file, of course you have to direct your browser to use this by altering the settings. Windows98 can create its own ramdrive, but from memory its a bit limited. Hope this helps. |
Rod ger (316) | ||
| 179891 | 2003-10-04 01:50:00 | Yah thanks people. I'm going to buy some more ram and have a crack at it. A swapfile on a ramdisk would pretty much be 100x faster than having it on the hard drive - because hard drives are about 100+ times slower than the slowest ram. | PoWa (203) | ||
| 179892 | 2003-10-04 02:10:00 | You would have to be using your swapfile a fair bit in normal usage to get any real performance increase. In which case the exta memory would cure the problem anyway, without a ramdrive. Unless you are using a specific program that uses the swapfile and is slowed down by this. |
Rod ger (316) | ||
| 179893 | 2003-10-04 03:25:00 | Exactly. The ramdrive will be slowed down by emulating a disk drive. Including being buffered. :D There are a lot of overheads. They were developed because it wasn't always easy to use more ram than 640k. Some programmes didn't work with extenders. Swap files were developed because memory was too expensive. The fix for slow swapping is more memory. | Graham L (2) | ||
| 179894 | 2003-10-04 03:54:00 | I remember a quote from Bill Gates (Or was it that IBM dude): "No PC will ever need more than 640k of RAM" If only that were so ;-) |
Chilling_Silently (228) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||